Energy Secretary Steven Chu told a House panel Tuesday that he’d give himself top marks when asked to grade his policies’ effects on energy prices. Rep. Darrell Issa, the chairman of the House committee on Oversight and Government Reform, asked President Obama’s top energy official if he’d grade himself with an “A minus” on “controlling the cost of gasoline at the pump.”

Chu responded by saying he’d give himself a better grade than that.

“The tools we have at our disposal are limited, but I would I say I would give myself a little higher in that since I became Secretary of Energy, I’ve been doing everything I can to get long-term solutions,” Chu said.

Talk about grade inflation.ABC News reported last night that gas prices have hit an all-time high for the month of March, although ABC claims that it may have peaked:

The average price of a gallon of regular is now $3.87, the highest recorded price in March. The average price is up nearly 4 cents from a week ago, and over 30 cents from a year ago, according to the Department of Energy, as more drivers face gas prices of $4 a gallon or more across the country.

Last week, the average gas price was $3.83 a gallon, the previous record according to data going back to 1990.

What led to the conclusion that prices may start coming down? One refinery has restarted production, and Saudi Arabia might make up for lost production in crude if Iran stops exporting oil. Those are mighty slender reeds on which to rest hope for a spring decline in gas prices.

If you’re wondering what the Obama administration record on gas prices really is, here’s the trend on average weekly national prices per gallon from the EIA:

The only way that looks like an A is if you intend to drive prices higher — say, to European levels. But that’s not policy … anymore … trust him on that.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

Of course he gives himself an A. Gas prices are going up, just like he said he wants them to do. He is acheiving his goal. People with any common sense just don’t agree with his goal.

No matter, how much we drill or shale or pretend that coal to liquid oil is viable (as Kermit explained in Jazz’s thread, its not) we are going to be subject to the whims of the global futures market. This is global capitalism, we can like it or leave it.

libfreeordie on March 20, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Only party true. Yes, the price of gas is subject to the global market, and when it comes to oil it is particularly subject to the futures market. But, you are ignoring what drives the futures market. The biggest factor in that is surety and volume of future supply. If we actually started exploring and drilling for the oil we have in North America now (even if that oil won’t hit the pumps for another ten years), the futures market would be more assured of the stability and volume of future supply, therby driving the price per barrel down now.

If you recognize the factor that the futures market plays, as you clearly note in your post, then have you asked yourself what is driving the futures market up right now? It seems like you have not. It’s the same thing that always drives up the price in a futures market… projections of availability of future supply relative to expected demand. So right now the futures speculators must be seeing evidence for a lack of supply relative to demand. So if that is driving prices up, then would not the opposite drive prices down? If we assured the market of future supply by expanding drilling, the assurance of supply to more closely meet demand would naturally drive prices back down.

Of course, they won’t go back down to less than $2/gallon, because we have the Fed printing money like it’s going out of style to ensure that we don’t default on our massive debt. That will naturally drive down the value of each dollar, which in turn drives up the prices of all goods.

The biggest problem I see with this administration’s economic policies (besides the obvious grandiose issue of government control of every aspect of our lives) is that they seem to think each of their policies occurs in a vaccuum, rather than as part of an overall system where one thing impacts every other thing. They can’t see the forest for all the trees.

Romney presented a balanced budget that he couldn’t get passed, so he had to go along with raising taxes and fees. He cut spending and reduced the deficit. He raised the gas tax which left it below other state averages. He extended an assault weapons ban already in place.

I used to be pro-abortion, ok genius? Changing one’s mind by adopting the right stance on an issue is to be praised. Now you know.

Romney presented a balanced budget that he couldn’t get passed, so he had to go along with raising taxes and fees. He cut spending and reduced the deficit. He raised the gas tax which left it below other state averages. He extended an assault weapons ban already in place.

I used to be pro-abortion, ok genius? Changing one’s mind by adopting the right stance on an issue is to be praised. Now you know.

Akzed on March 20, 2012 at 2:14 PM

You’re lying on all 3 fronts.

1. He changed his mind when he was 60 years old and just as he was getting ready to run for prez. You have to be really stupid to believe him

2. He proposed a balanced budget and signed a balanced budget….balanced by raising taxes. He didn’t cut a dime of spending. In fact spending during his 4 years increased 26% (lower as a % than Obama’s increase in spending)

3. He raised more than just a gas tax. He raised fees on everything from marriage licenses to car registration to fishing licenses to business licenses.

Some fun Romeny quotes on guns:

“that’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don’t line up with a lot of special interest groups.”

1. He changed his mind when he was 60 years old and just as he was getting ready to run for prez. You have to be really stupid to believe him

How does that prove I’m a liar? You may think he’s lying, but I’m just the messenger.

2. He proposed a balanced budget and signed a balanced budget….balanced by raising taxes. He didn’t cut a dime of spending. In fact spending during his 4 years increased 26% (lower as a % than Obama’s increase in spending)

…and, by the way, supply is not the only determinant of oil and gasoline prices. I’d suggest that a very large component is risk. By meddling in all aspects of our lives, this administration has increased risk for everyone. As a wonderful (/s) result, risk premium has shot up, rendering higher total costs for everything.

These people need to be extricated from the ship of state before they sink it.

Actually this gas price stuff today is good news for us down the road. Have no fear, when an R bccomes President the MSM and all the progressive screechers will be incapable of blaming him for high gas prices since they ave ALL said it can’t possibly be blamed on the POTUS. /s

In this instance he is admitting that his policies have an effect and assuming some responsibility, tomorrow when he is not under oath, he will be blaming everyone else again, and the media will give that heavy coverage without vetting a word.

If we all started calling oil imported from the middle east, africa and Chavez land “CONFLICT OIL” and started to call oil from Canada, Mexico and the US “North American Oil” I think we would have a better talking point. Do you remember the big turn around when diamonds were classified as “blood diamonds or conflict diamonds?” The market responded rather strongly…
Did you hear the Joe Biden clip from about 10 days ago where he said that our gov’t would just ask the Saudis to increase production? Really? Is that your solution Joe?

Has this guy ever gotten a “B” on anything in his life? It’s as if his world would shatter if he earned anything less than an A-. I’ve met people like this. They have a very hard time accepting less-than glowing performance reviews.

“The tools we have at our disposal are limited, but I would I say I would give myself a little higher in that since I became Secretary of Energy, I’ve been doing everything I can to get long-term solutions,” Chu said.

The problem is that he’s telling the truth – and the the ‘long-term solutions’ he’s doing everything he can about are helping *cause* the increase in prices – and it’s *intentional*.

You covered this subject pretty well, but don’t forget the corn-based Ethanol which government mandates force into our gasoline.

The ethanol pollution of our gasoline costs every gasoline user a 18 -33% degradation in mileage PLUS an extra $.57 per gallon!!! In addition, it reduces the life of engines and equipment used to handle, haul, or burn the polluted fuel: chiefly by introducing water into places it should never be. And this damage is IN ADDITION to the damage this inappropriate use of corn does by forcing higher worldwide food prices!

In addition, corn-based ethanol AT BEST produces the same amount of energy that it took to produce it, so there is NO NET GAIN in energy by use of ethanol. (In contrast, Brazil’s sugarcane-based ethanol produces 8 units of energy for every unit it takes to produce it).

I would I say I would give myself a little higher in that since I became Secretary of Energy, I’ve been doing everything I can to get long-term solutions,” Chu said.

Another communist inadvertently telling the truth, you just have to parse the words carefully. He has been working to get to a long term solution; unfortunately for all but the most privileged among us, that “long term solution” means:
a) Depending upon unreliable wind and sunshine to provide most of our electricity. When the batteries run low, us peasants will just be cold (or really hot) and hungry for a while
b) If we are lucky, we will be able to drive clown cars powered by batteries (as long as the conditions mentioned above yield sufficient electricity to charge the batteries or our government ration card still has sufficient allowance for more gasoline. The less fortunate among us will be required to ride the light rail transportation systems that are also part of his “long term solutions”
c) We will all be living much closer together in “intentionally planned” communities with very small highly energy efficient apartments to conserve energy and close enough to work so that we can either drive our clown cars or take the light rail to that workplace.

So yeah, in his skittles and unicorns world, he is doing just exactly what he needs to be doing to get to his long term solutions.

/Don’t know which is worse, when communists tell the truth or when they lie; either way, we the people wind up getting screwed.

Only party true. Yes, the price of gas is subject to the global market, and when it comes to oil it is particularly subject to the futures market. But, you are ignoring what drives the futures market. The biggest factor in that is surety and volume of future supply. If we actually started exploring and drilling for the oil we have in North America now (even if that oil won’t hit the pumps for another ten years), the futures market would be more assured of the stability and volume of future supply, therby driving the price per barrel down now.

Your missing the total dishonesty of liberals like him. He is saying that drilling now won’t do anything b/c the results won’t get on line for 10 or so years. they said this 10 years ago also. they don’t care that it will actually lower prices now and even more in 10 years, they just want to stop America from having any access to its natural resources because they hate America. So don’t try logic and reason with someone who is dishonest and doesn’t even want to figure out the best policy. He wants the worst policy. Whatever makes America suffer for its sins.

He is basically arguing that increased supply will never affect price. How can you try to reasonably argue with such idiocy?

He’ll make up silly arguments that even he doesn’t believe, he’ll change his argument and argue the exact opposite in the same thread, and he’ll lie consistently. That is because he will never argue his actual position which is that he does not want America to have the ability to drill its own oil, period. He knows that such a silly, america hating position can’t be argued so it’s all ossification and economic illiterate arguments.

While I don’t necessarily agree with Angryed’s position vis a vis Romney versus Obama, Angryed’s been posting here for years and has consistently been conservative. So, he is not a liberal troll. Unless the argument is that he is a “manchurian troll” who started posting here years ago and kept a conservative front for years knowing he was going to need to break out years later and “moby” us?

The high gas prices are NOT due Obama Administration incompetence but a DELIBERATE attempt to make alternative energy sources price competitive by escalating gas prices. Where the incompetence comes in is in the almost child-like belief that wind power, batteries and solar panels could fill our energy needs.And, although the alternative energy companies themselves failed (or are failing), Obama’s good ol buddies directing them, pocketed the taxpayers’ money.

I have applied to be one of Obama’s economic czars and am sure I will receive an acceptance letter any day now after submitting my latest proposal. Gasoline mixed with sniffing glue. In this manner customers will not only willingly accept high priced gasoline but will become addicted to it. A++.

Obowma takes ONE million dollars in campaign donations from BP prior to the oil spill in the gulf and thanks them by not allowing drilling in the gulf?

We’ve had ZERO permits issued in over TWO YEARS by this admistration that would increase oil production the next day and lowewr gasoline prices. These permits would allow us to drill badly needed water injection wells which increase oil production, and they have the gall to claim we are drilling more?

It’s not grade inflation, he’s grading himself on the curve established for this administration. If everyone in this administration is getting a 40 out of a hundred, which I believe to be generous, 35 to 40 is an A. And when the losers are voted out of office this November, they all get trophies for participation. That’s the liberal way.